You have to remediate students who have just failed the Standards of Learning Test(SOL) in a non-writing subject area. You have their raw score but do not know what questions they missed specifically and are having a hard time deciphering where they were "weak"other than what you heard from their regular teacher. Most of these students want to do well but they struggle with the basics. You do not know most of their names and have never worked with them. The state will not let you look at or use past tests nor past questions except the outdated ones they released and none of those question will be used. The students are not strong readers and are not from the same class. There are 29 of them and it is the last week of school before exams. You have 90 minutes and then they will retake the test.
OR
You are on a bus and it cannot go below 55 miles per hour.
Any questions?
One of these scenarios played at our school and in a similar fashion across our state. I faced it back in May and as I think back I am still bothered by the disservice to our students by the current testing system. With the aid of many other teachers I think I was able to help in some small way but I am left feeling that the bus deal may be more difficult but easier to control. NCLB waiver or no waiver the time, energy, resources, money and focus all poured to testing make schools a worse place, not better.
Someone please explain to me again how standardized testing and the millions we steer away from students in public schools and towards Pearson and the like is a good thing? This system makes about as much sense as Dennis Hopper did in Speed. I mean who does that?
If I release this switch, the testing company will explode.
In 1989 President George H. W. Bush brought together the nation's governors in my hometown for a summit on education. I was just starting as a high school junior and skipped school that day with my father in the hope I'd see the President speak at UVA's University Hall. I ended up back at school a short time later after being denied entry. The doors were shut just as I reached the front of the line. I was told at the door that even though I had the hard to come by ticket, it was common to oversell the tickets to such events to ensure the President spoke to a full house.
Twenty two years later it is clear that policies that grew out of that summit caused a massive shift in educational power from localities and states to the federal government. The climate of schools then and now and who they worry about satisfying differs a great deal. The economic turmoil of the 1970s and 1980s became linked to an educational crisis. Whether that link actually existed or not. The same is true today. This belief brought about major changes. Those changes now permeate daily life inside that same building I returned to that September day. The federal mandates have rained down onto localities, often without the needed funds. Among the biggest things that that summit produced was reliance and faith in testing as a means to remedy the now accepted belief that public schools were in big trouble. A direction begun and driven home under Bush then Clinton and again under Bush and now under Obama. Change is good when things get better. But the opposite is equally true. Change can be bad. The summit produced six goals(later expanded to 8) all of which have merit.
Annually increasing the number of children served by preschool programs with the goal of serving all “at-risk” 4-year-olds by 1995.
Raising the basic-skills achievement of all students to at least their grade level, and reducing the gap between the test scores of minority and white children by 1993.
Improving the high school graduation rate every year and reducing the number of illiterate Americans.
Improving the performance of American students in mathematics, science, and foreign languages until it exceeds that of students from “other industrialized nations.”
Increasing college participation, particularly by minorities, and specifically by reducing the current “imbalance” between grants and loans.
Recruiting more new teachers, particularly minority teachers, to ease “the impending teacher shortage,” and taking other steps to upgrade the status of the profession.
President Bush(center) with Governor Clinton(far right)
It is the pursuit of the goals that has seen less agreement. We've detailed the folly of that course ad nauseum but the over-influence of big testing companies, lack of research based evidence, and more than a decade of efforts without substantive results ought to mean that this approach has run its course. Instead we are in deeper and have perhaps literally invested too much in testing to give it up. In truth there have been few new ideas and true reform has been set aside in order to plow forward with testing, school accountability and privatization.
1983's A Nation at Risk report was the spark that lit the failing schools need fixing fire. Funny thing about that report and its' recommendations. It appears the Feds only read the cliffs notes versions and skipped some other important parts. It certainly is something we'll have to revisit down the road and warrants more than a cursory review from everyone in involved with education. There were more than a few phrases that caught my eye:
-the urgent need for improvement, both immediate and long term-how's that going almost 30 years later? -we refer to public, private, and parochial schools and colleges alike- and what is actually getting "reformed" -The tests should be administered as part of a nationwide (but not Federal) system of State and local standardized tests. Very interesting
-assistance of the Federal Government should be provided with a minimum of administrative burden and intrusiveness. I think some important people missed that point?
The 1990s saw this testing approach gain traction and support in both the statehouse and inside the beltway. It soon became clear there was money to be made. All of a sudden politicians, urged on by large companies now with a vested interest in promoting this direction started to take notice. Cynics would say lawmakers did so for either political or financial reasons. Others might say the rhetoric was just too irresistible. What began as basic skills testing is states like Texas blossomed into testing in competencies in periodic grades all along the path to graduation.
This reached its zenith under the heavily publicized but little understood Elementary and Secondary Education Act(NCLB). In the wake of the September 11th attacks most domestic policy remained 2nd tier at best. This law was a notable exception. No one gave the long term consequences much thought. When passed the Feds generally left it up to states to set marks and measure these standards. When asked if this approach compromised the law then Secretary of Education Rod Paige said the following:
"No. In our country we made that decision when the Constitution was drawn up. This is a state responsibility. This isn't a federal responsibility to set standards for states. So that argument's already been settled."
At the same time in 2002 noted testing expert from UCLA James Popham said of testing:
"Most educational policymakers, state board members, members of legislatures, are well intentioned, and install accountability measures involving these kinds of tests in the belief that good things will happen to children. But most of these policymakers are dirt-ignorant regarding what these tests should and should not be used for. And the tragedy is that they set up a system in which the primary indicator of educational quality is simply wrong. .... We have to create tests that really do reflect how well teachers have been teaching. Those kinds of tests will allow, I think, public education to survive. The kind of tests that we're using now is setting up public educators for absolute failure"
Rod Paige and Arne Duncan both led large urban school systems and it would be fair to say the issues they faced there might not have been exactly the same as most districts in the nation. For certain there were and are kids in every school in our nation that are historically underserved. But testing has proven far from an ideal solution. Many educators contend the unintended consequences have damaged our schools and hurt kids. Resistance to such test heavy approached was and is dismissed as defense of the status quo. This works given the accepted assumption that schools are and have been failing our nation for some time.
So where are we now and where are we headed. It was a comment by Geoffrey Canada which got my attention. His close contact with influential national leaders led him to observe "There is no plan". The comment referenced whether or not the feds or states had a solution to fix this perceived problem. Canada has done much to help kids and no doubt saved many. He's a common sense leader who was connected to teachers, school and what was really happening. A rare combination. In another address “You want to save your kids? You’re going to have to do it yourself,” he said. “Nobody’s coming.” Yet the Feds came. And so did the states. It started way back when and now appears the new paradigm in education is top down, test heavy and completely reliant on measurable results. The public seems to demand such outcomes if efforts and funding of public education is to be justified and seen as worthwhile.
The quest to remedy what we are and were doing wrong has led to the neglect and in some cases abandonment of what we were doing right. No doubt some things are better. I agree with much of what Mr. Bush called for 22 years ago. But some things are worse. The narrowing of goals, curriculum and focus on misguided measures of quality are not good things. In my state of Virginia 3% if school division made AYP in 2010-2011. If they really believed that meant something they'd fire everyone wouldn't they?
We can now tell whether a student has acquired needed information. But we might be losing sight of what makes a good school, a good teacher or a good education in our one size fits all approach. The lofty well intentioned individuals who affect school governance have increased control over what we do and how we do it. My only hope is that as we move forward I and all the other teachers will not be shut out of the conversation like I was shut out of U-Hall in 1989. I wonder if our state leaders were once again called to Charlottesville if the rhetoric would appear any different. Or would the call for reform simply reflect a consensus that our schools are in trouble and for the good of the nation something must be done.
“If enough people care, the public may learn the course is not wise, not reform and backed by no evidence. Public Education is a precious resource that must be preserved and improved for future generations.”
-Diane Ravitch, NCSS 2011
Diane Ravitch is a voice of reason and sanity in the politically charged and reckless world of education policy and so-called reform. The Teaching Underground had the privilege of hearing a lecture from Dr. Ravitch at the NCSS national convention this weekend in Washington, D.C.
Conventional wisdom might brand her “anti-reform,” but in reality the term educational reform has been high-jacked and turned into “testing, accountability, and choice” at the exclusion of meaningful reform seeking appropriate ways to “develop qualities of heart and mind and character to sustain our democracy for future generations.” The Teaching Underground is ready to steal the term back and label Diane Ravitch as the voice of true reform in American education.
After hearing Ravitch’s talk we jokingly said to each other, “she stole all of her material from the Underground.” Since our arrival in the blogging world in October 2010, we’ve learned that every challenge we’ve faced at the local level is rooted in the national education landscape. Like Ravitch, our primary hope is that people would care, and by caring, the public will learn that our present course of educational policy in the United States often guised as reform is really no reform at all.
Ravitch’s lecture at the NCSS Convention centered around a dozen or so questions. (I was typing fast, if you were there and see that we missed a question let us know.) Below are the questions Ravitch addressed. We've included a few links to related posts on the Teaching Underground. Feel free to offer your reactions to the questions, and if you were at the talk, let us know what you thought. We'll post about some of these topics in the months to come.
Are we in crisis?
-one of the very first posts on TU: Are We Failing?
Should public schools be turned over to private management?
Why not have a free market of choices for parents and students?
-these two questions were addressed in our post Breaking the Public Schools
Should public funded schools be allowed to make a profit?
-in April we discussed The Education Marketplace
Should teachers get a bonus for higher test scores?
Will test scores go up if teacher evaluations are tied to them?
Should student test scores ever be a part of teacher evaluation?
-each of these three questions remind me of the post Why You Should Care
Should NCLB be reauthorized?
-among other posts addressing NCLB, here is 2012 or 2014
Once upon a time before NCLB, I actually taught government. Then I was told I didn't. Just that simple(in a related twist Turner was told he did). The details of why are lost among the recesses of my mind but I was reassigned and not because of anything I did. It was a result of NCLB language. As a younger teacher it takes time to build a library of resources. Thus I relied heavily on the textbook in those days. So maybe I didn't meet the term "highly qualified" by my degree when I started but what new teacher ever does? I thought 6 years would have earned me that label. I was wrong.
Cleaning out the room last summer I came across some of the materials I used teaching government once upon a time. I recalled working hard to convey to all my senior students key ideas about our great nation. Liberty, Freedom, Opportunity and all the other cool stuff that makes us who we are as a country. It reminded me that I struggled with the constantly changing landscape of the politics. Elections made it hard to keep up with the faces and names. I learned quickly to steer the focus of my students to the bigger ideas of our democracy.
One thing I constantly stressed with my kids back then was that they mattered. Once they turned 18, and even before, they could make a difference. Their voice, their wallet, their time and of course their vote were all ways to make an impact. I tried very hard to instill in them a sense of political efficacy. Beyond that I tried to convey that there is a common set of beliefs that somehow weaves us all together as Americans. As I examined an old notebook of mine and weighed its fate, some of the materials caught me eye.
One section I had written said: Basic ideas of Democracy
1. Worth of the individual(respect all people, make sacrifices for group: like taxes)
2. Equality of all persons(does not mean all have same abilities, all should have an equal chance and same under law)
3. Majority rule, minority rights(usually make correct decisions, must listen to minority)
4. Need for compromise(blending of different views, important to freely express ideas)
5. Individual Freedom(everyone given freedoms but they must be limited, complete freedom would result in anarchy, democracy balances freedom and authority)
That pretty much sums up a great deal of what this country is about. Oh and the fact that we are awesome...that part I left out. As I sat my mind wandered to how I would deal with today's political climate if still teaching government. What a challenge I thought. Or is it? Politics certainly enters my classroom discussion from time to time. With 9th graders you have to tread a little lighter than with 12th graders. I'd describe the grasp of politics for most of them as knowing just enough to be confused or dangerous. But I sense they also share a love of our nation coupled with a growing dislike of the political tensions within the government running it. Left or Right it doesn't seem to matter.
These thoughts of our government segway nicely to thoughts about education. We live in a nation that sees fit to place the important choices in the hands of those farthest from the classroom, farthest from the students, farthest from the parents and farthest from the impact of those decisions. To paraphrase JFK "the very word secrecy in a free and open society is repugnant." This approach has come to symbolize our country’s educational management in many ways. Small numbers of people with a great deal of influence. Dissent is dismissed or silenced not welcomed. The idea of questioning things and being able to ask questions and get answer is intertwined with independence is the seed that made this nation strong. Within our many of our nations school systems that idea has been stifled and confined by a desire to control or micromanage, much to the detriment of our children, our schools, our profession and our future. Top down decision have become the norm. Nationally there has always been concern about ceding too much control to those at the top and the practice is reserved for extreme crisis. Existing or manufactured that seems to have been the case in education.
There are a handful of professional endeavors as noble as to teach the young. That is not to say teachers are in any way better than any other member of our society. But is an acknowledgment that they perhaps best understand how to educate. Why is it then the financing, structure, and curriculum of our schools is controlled by those who no longer work in a school? As flawed a model as there ever was.
Our democracy allows for each of us to find his or her own path and pursue it as we see fit. Pity it does not allow some of these same freedoms within our schools. I guess there's good reasons for this. But it could be argued that schools are now operated by the ill informed who do not visit, ask or experience before making decisions. Who follow the reform of the hour with no accountability as to the result. Who make decisions without enough concern or understanding. Subject to be misinformed either intentionally or out of ignorance .
Our schools are not political capital.. They are not an intellectual laboratory. They are not static. They are not perfect. They are not all truly failing. And most certain of all most people in them think they are not currently being well led from the top. Failure here lies with anyone who does not recognize the value of allowing our schools to create their own identity, community and pursue it to best serve their own kids.
What all that venting reveals is I have a low sense of educational efficacy. Surely I make a difference with my kids. But it grows increasingly more difficult to do so as well as I used to. Whether it be new testing, curriculum, value added, compensation practices, treatment of longtime employees, resource allocation, over-reliance on technology, a disconnected leadership structure, poor evaluation systems, promotional practices, privatization of public school funds, reform policies in general, they are woeful when compared to what could and should be done. In short it just seems a lot going on here is contrary to much of what is on the list above.
Let's dismiss for a moment all the academic things schools do. I suggest this since I admit readily that kids learn as much (perhaps more) about life outside of my classroom as in it. I strongly believe that the rich nature of the experiences that kids encounter in school best enables them to succeed and thrive.
But, that is not why schools exist. Schools were created to teach our young people what society determines they need to know. For better or worse, this is how students and teachers are measured. If a kid does not "get" what they need, the school shares an increasing amount of the responsibility.
In recent years the pressure has grown to maximize what kids learn. Few would argue with the idea that we should try to teach all kids more. What sometimes goes unnoticed is the price paid for such efforts and uniformity and even volume. NCLB was clearly motivated by efforts to better serve populations that were traditionally underserved in public schools. But it turned into a monster that must be fed.
It’s not as much about what is taught as it is about what is measured. We grew so eager to measure what kids learn that we’ve made the measurement the point. With so much additional focus on testing, something has to go to make room. Trying to keep good, fun, quality learning becomes a greater challenge by the day.
So, something’s gotta give. There is just not enough time. We could go to school every day all year. The problem would still exist.
Time has come today
Young hearts can go their way
Can't put it off another day
I don't care what others say
They say we don't listen anyway
Time has come today
Those are prophetic words indeed. I see the relationship of these words to education as we continue to fit more and more into a full glass. The constant is not the length of the school day or calendar, it is the fact kids are people. More accurately they are young people. They need time for themselves. They need to decompress. They need downtime.
Each year it seems we ratchet up the pressure on them to do more to the point where the phrase joyless childhood might even apply to some. Though I think of Chinese schools first with this description, I hear more and more from anguished parents and students who are reaching the breaking point.
Most conversations about time come back to the topic of how much time students spend on homework. I am aware that homework now consumes a significant portion of my students’ lives. They have trouble finding the proper balance. For too many it amounts to spending too much or none. I always laugh at how we now control their access to sugar, fried foods, websites and the like but don't seem to recognize or seek to help them choose an appropriate course workload.
So how much is too much? With 9th graders it is among the most commonly asked question.
Our division moved from a schedule of seven periods to eight periods two years ago. Is this too much? Who knows, but is certainly has become for a number of students. Maintaining high standards and continuously increasing achievement with a greater volume of coursework conflicts with some basic notions: We want kids to enjoy school so that they choose to participate, we want kids to develop a love of learning, we want kids to be kids and have the freedom to explore a diversity of opportunities outside of the school environment.
A recent article from the Atlantic puts a focus on how much this emphasis on quantity and volume of instruction might impact our children.
"Since about 1955 ... children's free play has been continually declining, at least partly because adults have exerted ever-increasing control over children's activities," says the author Peter Gray, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology (emeritus) at Boston College.
Even in the form of additional opportunities and offerings, educational requirements are adding to the ever-increasing adult control of children’s activities.
The article concludes by saying:
When parents realize the major role that free play can take in the development of emotionally healthy children and adults, they may wish to reassess the priorities ruling their children's lives.
Perhaps it is not only parents who need to reassess priorities.
The link below takes you to a recent NY Times article someone sent me that shows the ground level impact of NCLB. It comes from New Hampshire, a state not usually on the radar of education reform. Too bad above average schools like Oyster River are now labeled as failing and must completely redesign their approach to instruction and learning. Think it is not your problem? Your division is different? Your local leadership will make things right? Think again. Arne Duncan and the neo-reform NCLB folks know better than the thousands of educators and are acting like it. Want waivers from NCLB? Let's make a deal.
"Ms. Rief fears that public schools where teachers are trusted to make learning fun are on the way out. Ms. Rief understands that packaged curriculums and standardized assessments offer schools an economy of scale that she and her kind cannot compete with."
Is this the system we want?
This is a quick clip that summarizes what they are telling you to do...I mean choose to do.
"The kind of progress we want to see" "States are going to have to embrace the kind of reform that we believe is necessary to move our education system forward" "Accountability will remain one of the bellwethers of our administration"
My colleague in one of his latest posts gave some perspective on the idiocy of NCLB. We are back at work this week diligently attending meetings out the wazoo. In many of these conversations, talk turns to moving beyond the SOLs. On Orientation night I ran into a parent of one of my kids from 1st semester and she mentioned her child's result on said SOL and I felt like the butler in this video. Like most teachers I wanted to be Rocky Balboa at the end of a fight and raise my hands in the air with my students and claim victory. No such luck. The truth is that moving beyond something as ginormous as the SOLs will be tough for many reasons.
In a post earlier this year I shared my state of mind when I got the SOL results. These determine whether or not our school makes AYP(we did not), how I am measured, and many other things. After 2nd semester's results came in I wasn't so much confused as I was frustrated and angry. SOLs have made me like Rocky in the later movies, my brain turning to mush from constant pounding. The punches coming from all this SOL/AYP talk. I just can't get this whole SOL conversation out of my head. It has become all consuming. Not because I focus only on SOL content or whether the school or division is making AYP. It's because like many teachers I think about the impact on individual kids. Too often when I see a parent or kid the test comes up. And it should. People should be outraged...protesting...calling for firings(not mine please)...or at the very least not buying Dixie Chick Albums.
What do these scores and test results mean? In other words..."what is the truth behind the SOL?"
I'll avoid the school or division wide discussion here. This Spring's results got my dander up(whatever that means) so with some colleagues we expended some effort back in June trying to find out what the truth was about how we really did. As we peeled back the layers of the testing onion it got pretty stinky at times. I thought sharing some of what we learned might illicit a degree of empathy from the non-teachers among you that went to school before we migrated to this other-worldish test driven planet. After all we teachers can't be malcontents all of the time and need some help.
At first glance the numbers appeared to show me 2 things about my kids. No surprises passing wise...but there was an pronounced drop in Pass Advanced(scores over 500). So I started to ask what exactly the difference was in how scores were labeled (Pass Advanced/Pass Proficient) and then how exactly the test scores were calculated(not that I hadn't asked this before mind you). What I found, or didn't find was troubling. The labels applied to results seem to have little to no value as an educational tool. But I'm getting ahead of myself.
Back to my conversation with the parent where I shared that my own feelings on SOLs are pretty complex. I can only imagine the feelings and confusion involved for parents and kids. Testing generates one powerful thing. Data data data...I spent more time this year looking at my numbers than I did in the previous 10 combined. To be fair it could be said I was not looking at data this time but instead trying to find the answers I wanted. When those in the higher ranks of education policy engage in this practice I am highly critical. I tried to share with the parent a combination of brief history of SOLs and some analysis at the same time and somewhere communicate something resembling the truth. This included the fact that these numbers have to be interpreted and despite claims to the contrary, numbers can lie.
To begin a little background:
400 is passing proficient, 500 is pass advance, 600 is a perfect score.
Tests and questions in Social Studies EOC tests are not released. The state adopts a cut score and this is a criterion referenced test(I am not sure those statements are compatible).
No one other than the people who make and grade the tests seem to fully understand everything about these tests and that seems to be the way they like it. The amazing lack of transparency is troubling.
So as I explored my results I was bothered by the logic of a grading system where one kid answers 35 correct and gets a 417, another student in the same class who gets a 415 but got 36 correct(different test versions). The company (Pearson) points this possibility out but again my brain is mush so I don't get it. So mush and all let's look at a random student who got a 492 and received a Pass Proficient rating. What does that mean? Not that much honestly from what I could tell.
On the World History I test there are 6 categories and a score of 50 means the students answered all of the questions in that category correctly. The amount of questions in each category varies by the weight of the category.
Here are the results for that student:
40 RC1 = Human Origins and Early Civilizations
38 RC2 = Classical Civilizations
50 RC3 = Postclassical Civilizations
45 RC4 = Regional Interactions
42 RC5 = Geography
34 RC6 = Civics and Economics
Usually the reports we get from Pearson are about as clear as Rocky's vision when he uttered the phrase "cut me Mick."
We get an overall number and some scores in the six separate categories. My favorite part is this section of the report that reads... "Reporting category scores, which are on a scale of 0-50, can be used to identify students' strengths and weaknesses. A score of 30 or above indicates a strength. A score of less than 30 indicates that the student may benefit from additional instruction in this area". So this particular student was judged as "strong" in each area but only received a Pass Proficient.
So why not Pass Advanced?
We asked the same thing when we saw the drop in scores and what kids got what scores. Here is what I found and it honestly came a little late to comfort me or any of my kids when they were judged as only "Proficient". As for what that means here is a link to the VDOE summary of performance level descriptors for each grade and end of course test(note the absence of Social Studies descriptions). These labels are supposed to assist parents, students and teachers in understanding how they did. But few understand what the labels actually mean or how they are determined. AYP for our school only factors in pass rates and is unaffected by these terms. But kids are and some took it pretty hard. Use of these without proper context would be as dangerous as a kid running with scissors and likely invalid when used to measure how we are doing. Is the same true for individuals? Some of my kids and parents were disappointed especially those who got a Pass Proficient. My disappointment stemmed from the drop in Pass Advanced scores and seeing the reaction of kids who have grown up with these tests and sadly measure themselves by how they do.
These pie charts graphically illustrate the data from my honors classes only.
What a difference a year makes! Before you call for my firing or resignation spend a second thinking about some of the stuff we've written about on this blog that affected our results. Adding an additional class to teachers and student workloads and switching to the 4x4...guess what. Looks like it made a difference. But so did the test.
The graph above shows the difference in 4x4, A/B and totals the last 2 years. Ouch is all I said. To an outsider it would be evidence we weren't doing as good of a job. But that is misleading to say the least. On the 4x4 we had to go fast and that meant cut some things out. The obvious choice is material that is not going to be assessed and that is a shame. I still felt I gave them a solid class that was rich and varied enough to feel they were prepared to do well. The test was made "more rigorous" which I welcome but it is apparent the test makers view of what to stress is different from the people who actually teach kids. (I 'll have to thank the State Super for the heads up on these shifts next time I see her) I had some really smart kids who knew their stuff and was as surprised as them when they didn't get a Pass Advanced.
Nothing I have found gives any meaning to the terms Pass Advanced/Pass Proficient in social studies and I have looked everywhere. But that is the first thing parents see that has any meaning to them. The difference is simply it says one is a 400(31 right) and one is a 500(53 right). We spent some time figuring out the exact scale(neither the state nor Pearson gave us this...maybe because they don't want people to know that kids only need to get 1/2 of the questions to pass). If they used the scale from previous years the drop in my kids scores would not have been as dramatic.
The tough part is many kids define their performance by these terms but don't even know what they mean. They might know(most do not) they can miss 29 questions and pass but incorrectly assume that the break from 400 to 500 is halfway to a perfect score. It is not. So the truth appears to be these labels and numbers have little substantive meaning. They just fall in from where they set the cut score for 400 and exist in a vacuum until they are pulled out by a bean counter somewhere or by parents who are unable to put these in proper perspective. So I hear frustration and confusion when results come up. Well what do you want for a couple million...?
Since "they" have yet to release more than 1 test in social studies(I have yet to see a test or question still being used beyond the things like the sparse examples found here)) and also do not provide specific feedback, I can't really tell what kids knew and what they didn't. Consequently I have no way of doing a better job preparing my 2nd semester kids by using results from 1st semester and no way to improve next year. This is the type of thing that says to me the SOLs and a great deal are not really for the benefit of the teachers or kids. This quote seemed fitting on so many levels of the testing approach in my state: "Is there anything that we are doggedly pursuing without regard to the actual impact it is having on our intended audience? If it only makes sense to us, it may not be making sense at all."
Staying with the theme of not making sense, the kid's detailed report reads something like this: "Question Description: Describe an essential belief of a major religion.---- Incorrect." So I can tell they missed a question about religion but not which religion or what specifically they didn't know. Was it Islam or Christianity? The founder or how they worship? Imagine one about civilization,...but was it Greece, Rome, Japan Inca...who knows? Throw in the silly graphics, poorly worded questions and inferences required and the misses start to add up. Pretty useless honestly other than just assigning a score and determining minimal competence for AYPs sake.
So here's the truth, truth... I think SOLs do more harm than good and I hate them. I hate people who promote their use and do so from a position far from their impact. I hate the fact people point to kids scores but not kids accomplishments. I hate I am being asked to move beyond the SOLs but still have to deal with issues like this. I hate how they are adding a "college ready" designation in some subjects...think for a second about the impact that'll have on kids who don't meet that mark. I hate that the term "failing schools" has gained footing and is commonly used but like an SOL score it carries little concrete meaning unless you fully understand it. As for measuring the kids performance, I'll stick to my more holistic measure...I call it a grade.
Hope some of this "truth" made sense and you didn't get too punchy towards the end.
Last year I had 132 students. I was shocked when I had to fail 128 of them after they took their final examination. Only four of my students were good enough according to the standards that I set for my class, so I had not other choice than to fail all of the rest. I hope they learn a lesson and do better this year.
Some of them are very bright, they just didn't master all of the material of the course. Some of them struggle at home and I know they don't have the best support. Most of them would surprise you. You'd never guess they were failures by talking to them. They are articulate and hardworking. I bet they could even succeed in college. Too bad they can't meet the standards of my class.
Does this frustrate you? I find it frustrating. If this scenario were true, there are only two possible interpretations. 1) I am a terrible teacher and need to be removed from the classroom; or 2) The standards and assessments are unreasonable and need to be adjusted. It is that simple. I am either expecting too much or I'm not adequately preparing my students to meet appropriate standards.
The state of Virginia recently released Annual Yearly Progress data for each of its 132 divisions. Only four divisions met AYP. Across the state last week, cities and counties watched their local news to hear about more failure from our public school systems. Politicians and educrats continue to make a mockery of the institution of public education. The only rational reaction to a figure like this (128/132) is to abolish the horrible failure that is public education or get real and admit that our metrics for measuring student, teacher, and school effectiveness are inadequate.
Responding to the media, Albemarle County Public Schools spokesperson Maury Brown said, "we don't think that the worth of a single child or teacher or school system should be measured by a standardized test." Assistant Superintendent Billy Haun said, "we know as a division where we are. I can’t help how the state has chosen to look at success.” As a division, the county achieved 91% pass rates in Reading and Math. Yet for 2010-2011, Albemarle County has failed.
We can't have it both ways, the numbers are meaningless or they're not. As long as administrators hold pass rates up to their teachers and make judgments on teacher effectiveness at the school level it's hard to defend that our divisions shouldn't face consequences from the state and federal government when pass rates don't meet expectations. Individual educators and divisions alike could benefit greatly if testing data could inform decision-making, but data has become the point of education.
Looking back in frustration and ahead with hope, the second part of the quote from Billy Haun might be the most important part of the story. Can we help how the state (and even the federal government) has chosen to look at success? I don't know the answer to that question, but I believe that we need to try. Otherwise we're just spinning our tops and playing games with the students who depend on us. If these metrics are accurate it's time to stop playing safe and abolish this public education and start all over again. If they're not, then let's stop pretending and start acknowledging the quality work produced by principals, teachers, and students every day.
We may not believe that that the worth of a single child or teacher or school system should be measured by a standardized test, but how do we uphold that belief with action?
My colleague mentioned we are immersed in testing season...and to a teacher that imagery might more closely be associated with being water-boarded. Watching your kids take one is awful...simply awful. I am also passing through the busiest period of the tennis season and my coaching obligations, while very worthwhile, are quite extensive. So below is assembled a hodgepodge of ideas I had recently that perhaps don't warrant their own post but I thought might be worth sharing via TU.
School Funding and Vouchers
One of the worst things we can do to education is continue the push to privatize it. There is a role that for profit companies can play but when they get too big a piece of the pie they become like a dog fed at the table. Once they get a taste of public funding they won't go away. They become dependent on it and only want more. Their presence is driven exclusively by one desire, to get what they want, profits. In the case of schools it will come a very stable and reliable source, the government. When profits are placed ahead of what's good for kids and schools, we've got trouble.
As changes in funding continue to rattle the establishment things like vouchers come up. I try to avoid discussing them as they tend to be a polarizing issue. I only ask that a few things be kept in mind. They will not "fix" the schools we have. Taking money from already underfunded schools(not necessarily where I work) is bad. I've sat in private school classrooms and short of the the obvious they aren't a whole heck of a lot different from public school classrooms. But...those classrooms lie in schools that have the power to exclude kids and keep them out. You want to fix public schools...give them that power. Problems solved. Wait .... what? I would never actually suggest that. I was a literary device called sarcasm and it illustrates how representing vouchers as the solution is way off base(that's a metaphor).
Vouchers are hard to nail down as they mean different things in different places. One of the few worthwhile efforts to figure out their impact came in Milwaukee where some smarterer folks than me looked at their impact(See the study summary here). I only really remember one sentence as I perused it during an emotional episode of Deadliest Catch. This was the sentence..."A full eight years after the school district expanded the voucher program, it is still not possible to measure whether voucher students in Milwaukee perform better or worse than their counterparts who remain in public schools." Any questions?
Breaking the Teachers
What I am seeing is what I fear most. This wave of reforms are getting rid of the good teachers not the so called "bad" ones. High stakes testing doesn't reward the best teachers it frustrates them and drives them away. Is the business model the best approach reformers on the outside can come up with? What else should we expect when you have people who aren't really teachers making decisions. While reading a recent article in The Daily Progress about how some Divisions Superintendents had approached the state about possible changes to Elementary SOLs, I was struck by a quote from Superintendent of Public Instruction Patricia Wright. While leaning against the requests she stated "I am a teacher at heart … and I just find it hard to believe that teachers can't be creative and they can't teach enriched curriculum while at the same time making sure that students have basic knowledge and skills"
I harbor no ill-will towards Wright and she might even be correct on the issue above. But the teacher at heart part stuck in my craw(For those taking the biology SOL the "craw" is in your gut near where you get side stitches and next to the gizzard). I googled her and found she "served as chief deputy superintendent, acting superintendent, deputy superintendent, assistant superintendent for instruction, director of secondary instruction, associate director of secondary instruction and state mathematics specialist." So its evident her ascension is well earned. But to me that simply meant she has not worked in a Public School in 26 years. Let's see...early to mid 80s... I was in school in the same county where I teach and if you are unaware, they have changed a bit since.
I flash back to a local elementary community classroom that had no separation between rooms and might be linked to my short attention span. What was I saying? Oh yes, I can't remember what we learned but I do remember some things. I recall among them finding out I'd be re-districted to a new middle school in the coming year and how that affected my grades, watching the solar eclipse...dispensing with the cardboard contraption we made in science class and using my naked eye at various points, playing soccer during lunch and the day they wheeled in the Apple II so we could learn "LOGO" programming language. The landmark I.D.E.A had even been thought up yet. Some say education was better then, some say better now, but both agree different.
But Wright's no dummy. She's articulate, highly educated, well-informed, and most importantly well-intentioned. Here's what she is not. She is not a teacher. I'm a teacher. No one thinks quite like me. I know my school and I know my kids. Why then do people listen to those who aren't teachers before listening to teachers? Makes about as much sense as staring at an eclipse without that stupid cardboard box device on your head(see post for real facts here).
Before coming to VDOE in 1985, Dr. Wright taught mathematics for 10 years at the secondary and middle school levels in Sussex County and Chesterfield County public school. But she no longer thinks like me, a teacher. Not at all. I suspect she thinks more like a politician. She has served as the Super for both Democratic and Republican Governors and no one, I mean no one, thinks like a teacher, unless they teach kids each day, every day.
Privatizing Education-The Market
Some argue to improve education we should let the markets control the direction of policy and decisions. That's exactly what we shouldn't let happen as the "market" can be a very de-stabilizing element. If nothing else public schools are stable. They are admittedly hard to change but the good thing is that stability should be seen like a rock solid retirement investment. Should we let Wall Street drive the decisions that prepare our children as it did for the economy in the period leading up to the end of 2007, or with the dot-coms bubble, or the oil spike of the 80s and 90s, or in the 1920s(the list goes on)? High Risk, high reward? I'd hope not but I think we are a little late. For 10 years now things have been leaning more and more in that direction. What's changed for the better? While public confidence in schools is seemingly at an all time low, scary to think how readily talk of competition and improvement echoes a financial firms commercials. But how much more fragile would schools and our confidence in schools be if we let Wall Streets or Gates and Broad lead? One year's decline in scores or a principal's departure might undermine confidence as it does the market's confidence following a news headline or singular event. One thing I know is that while funding our schools may be been more challenging during these periods of economic volatility, we should not take risks and cede control to those with divided loyalties.
All that is required for these things to occur is that smart level headed people, perhaps like those of you reading this blog, to say and do nothing. Before you scurry down to the registrar and sign up to run for school board, get more informed. Get more active and at the least more vocal about the issues affecting our schools. Talk to teachers and avoid claims of being on their side and ask what they think. Most of all make sure the positions and decisions you support will not break what isn't yet broken. Too many people already fit that mold.
As the Underground wraps up Spring Break I find my mind wandering and relax watching ALL of the Masters so pardon my lack of focus with this post. But I am reminded the "end" is near.
I recall just last week my classes sped through our unit on Mesoamerica before one of many looming deadlines. We watched one of my favorite videos on the Maya and it included a segment on how the cycle of creation comes to an end and the Mayan Long Count expires on December 21st, 2012. The end of days. It sparked some interesting discussion and we chose to ignore the potential Federal Government Shutdown and its impact. Most people are now familiar with the doomsday predictions for when the Mayan Calendar ends. I found it funny how both political parties are spinning out similar predictions about the effects of a shutdown. What's the connection? Great question(sorry not on the test though).
Flashback 50 years ..."First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind..." these words came from President John F. Kennedy in May of 1961. Powerful rhetoric that put the heat on everyone involved to achieve this goal. I spoke recently to man man(who asked to remain anonymous) who after staging moon landings and covering up the JFK assassination said that if we make it to 2013, we might not make it much past 2014. That's the year when the much maligned No Child Left Behind legislation demands that all children be proficient in reading in Math. "Who's the we" I asked. Did he mean schools? He mumbled something about President Obama's proposed revisions to the law and how he and Congress weren't likely to do much better and then pressed a flashy red thing on his pen(did I mention he was dressed in black?).
The 2001 NCLB Act was President George W. Bush's(erroneously referred to in all failing public schools as Bush Jr.) call to action to make our schools better. NO child would be left behind in an ambitious plan reminiscent of the days of the Space Race. Among the authors of this bill were current House Speaker John Boehner and President Kennedy's late brother Ted. The bill did something pretty amazing, it took a well intentioned effort at reform and created a federal act that messed everything up. In fact it makes many of us teachers feel analogous to the Russians during the Space Race. I'll borrow heavily here from Gerald Bracey and his "THE SEVEN DEADLY ABSURDITIES OF NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND" critique but it went about things the wrong way. Actually many wrong ways...a mistake that continues today. So states and schools have chimed in with their own ominous prediction when most of their schools are deemed "failing" and kids allowed to transfer. While Bracey rants a bit at the end( something I do well myself), pardon him as he illustrates much of what went wrong. Imagine if Kennedy(had he not been killed by the Oswald, the mafia, CIA, Castro, Russians, man on the grassy knoll or all of the above) had punished an entire agency or dept at NASA when one engineer miscalculated something? Somehow we made it to the moon but where is NCLB and now Race to the Top taking us? Another great questions...ask again at the end of class.
As a young teacher in 2001 I paid no attention to the law. Did anyone in schools really? That changed when scores started to matter. Admitting some good has come from the law it is the unintended effects that are frightening. Will it bring the end or at least contribute to the undoing of our public schools as some predict? I am uncertain but I have grave concerns about where we continue to be driven by Federal legislation intended to improve our schools. In my view new reform ideas are even less likely to realize improvement than the old. Where they succeed is making schools focus too much on testing, demoralizing our educators and potentially undoing much of the good we have done educationally the last century. When others ask why I oppose a lot reform they overlook the reality that there are just some things teachers know and understand that others cannot.
Bracey gets this and also talked in a separate post about the "schools suck bloc" and in some small way connects the title of this post, my unfocused rantings and actual events. Schools can only do so much and in that sense they are just like my unit on Mesoamerica. Set some realistic goals, make a plan, and get going. Just don't forget about the people involved. A rocket and a kid are different...though both can go off course without warning sometimes.
I have not fared well in predicting the future but I will say one thing for certain. Kids, schools, teachers, even our federal budget all face an uphill climb at times and we don't need any scary partisan rhetoric or cumbersome legislation making the hill steeper. Is 2012, 2014 or tomorrow the end? Another great question. I have to go back to the last government shutdown and I guess that also depends on what your meaning of is, is.That's for a later post
I read an encouraging article today in our local Charlottesville newspaper, The Daily Progress titled "Expert Seeks Deeper Education Reforms." Dr. Pedro Noguera from New York University believes that we place too much effort trying to get students passing scores on standardized tests. Noguera also says, "we have found ways to insure that with the right strategies we can educate all kinds of people.” I appreciate the use of "strategies" versus "strategy."
I certainly appreciate Dr. Noguera's point of view, but to paraphrase a quote from a previous post, "we're drowning here and he's describing the water." A few solutions are hinted in this talk. He states “the people who make policies have never been educators and they simply don't understand, and even when they see it firsthand, they still don't understand what it takes to get young people excited about learning.”
I agree, but would also add that I don't understand what it takes to get an urban New Yorker or a rural Georgian excited about learning. I'm confident that given the right support and a little experience I could learn quickly, but the expert on exciting these young people about learning are the students themselves, their parents and caregivers, and the teachers who interact with them daily. Until the power to inform educational policy shifts from the distant politician and insulated departments of education to the stakeholders most invested in public education real education reform will not be realized.
The article closes with another quote from Noguera, “when you have students entering high school and reading on a third-grade level that is not a high school problem... that's a systemic problem.” We have learned in various disciplines that system problems have system answers. Top down reform cannot fix a systematic problem. In a hierarchical system, the actors at the top have too much vested to entertain significant change at the top level. What we end up with are myriad changes at the bottom of the pyramid which still support the unchanging structures at the top.
Where does this lead? As a teacher, the title of this post is addressed to my students. We are stuck in the middle together. Academics and educational experts know what quality education looks like and they expect us to deliver. Politicians and district and state level administrators expect us to meet standard measurements of performance delivered in the form of test scores and pass rates. This means that I live in two realities, with my students. We balance the demands of both, but more and more, the weight on the side of standardized testing grows and grows.
Here in the classroom, we are stuck, in the middle. The article referenced above stuck out because it is proof for me that people understand what we need in public education. Yet still, schools and teachers are torn between serving two masters. One master says test scores are the only metric we care about and the other says focus on learning that matters and not the tests. (Someone wise had something to say about serving two masters.)
That's the end of the post, but I can't create a title like this without giving proper credit, so here's a little Stealer's Wheel for your Wednesday afternoon.
This thought recently passed through the minds of my colleagues and myself as we reviewed our students mid year SOL scores. We each originally did so in isolation and when we came together and realized that everyone had seen a drop in student performance, I am not sure we felt much better. We got our scores by E-mail and the next day sat down in our PLCs (professional learning communities) to gather ourselves. We realized that there was a rather precipitous drop in how we did not just as individuals, but as a department. And present company excluded we have some darn good teachers so what gives? It is a question that plagued us that might not have any singular answer. We wiped the confusion off our faces and tried doing one of the few things we could, teach.
What this insecurity revealed was how vulnerable we remain with the use of a single indicator. What was clear was that our department had done terribly compared to previous year(s) which goes against every trend. We did not see this coming. Though roughly half of the students have taken these tests(many honors and AP student are enrolled in year long courses and will take the test in May) and percentages should go up, there were some very disturbing trends. Fact is, our scores stunk. The funny thing about facts is they often don't answer questions, they only make you ask more.
Recently the state contracted with a new testing company. There is plenty of the usual edujargon about how the tests would be scored(little of which anyone truly understands). This company was tasked with administering new standards. In my subject there were in fact very few significant differences and given the tests and questions are treated like national security secrets, not sure we'll be able to get a handle on whether the test difficulty changed. We wondered if they specifically asked questions targeting all the new content or not. If they did it might perhaps provide some explanation but would seem a flawed approach. The scary part about this is that I've begun to question the validity of the test. If the test was "harder" wouldn't that throw off all that statistical mumbo-jumbo used to make the results more valid. Maybe it was how the test was scored, the size of the sample of students used to norm the test, the score drop for each teacher, the drop on all 3 SOL subject tests, similar issues at all our local high schools, or even being shocked by the drop in kids that got a perfect score for me last year...Something's fishy.
A cynic might suggest this was some covert effort to discredit our schools and prove we are failing(I do not share this alarmist approach). Our scores have always gone up and by 2014 100% of students in Virginia must pass every test. This is not actually going to happen. Just thought it needed to be said. That's a discussion for later post. Maybe the testing company felt some pressure to "up the ante" and ensure they could be trusted. Maybe they used all new questions and content we were accustomed to teaching now was no longer being assessed. It would be an understatement to say these scores are designed to confuse. In the past we might look next for correlations with AP scores to gain insight but can't yet compare that data. Would that even help?
Not being a total conspiracy theorist I think other factors are at least worth mentioning. To begin I had a student teacher. Those that didn't saw the same thing so that's probably not it. The school switched from an every other day A/B yearlong schedule to every day 4x4 semester classes. Some dismiss this completely but I actually think this could explain a small drop, but not to the degree we experienced. This schedule stinks! It was implemented last minute and is just not what I consider beneficial for learning. We have far less time for instruction both in length of classes and total numbers of days, enough so that days were added two days before exams to meet minimum state requirements.
The timing of the tests was not ideal as we started them immediately after the Holiday break. This likely affected at risk kids more and they took it even later after exams, two weeks later. We as teachers are also teaching 1 more class than in previous years. That means about 25-30 additional kids for each of us(I'll teach 157 by years end, but there is talk of of "capping" it at 150...gee thanks). When you do this more of the responsibility inevitably shifts to the learner. Teachers just can't provide as much attention and help. It is tough. Moreover most kids are taking one additional class adding to their burden.
Still I sit here in some weird funk. Disappointed for the kids who failed, working with others to help those who qualify to retake the test immediately, and just plain ticked I am no closer to finding out exactly what happened...and most important to me, AVOIDING THIS IN THE FUTURE. I don't have the direct means to improve my teaching for these kids on these tests. I'm not just talking about data. Data has a funny way of satisfying those far removed from what is really going on, but most teachers say it is overrated. While the decline of the higher achieving kids might not be what gets the attention in the AYP world, it is equally as troubling. I am now experienced enough to comprehend the greater significance of the SOL test, how those scores are used, and what they really mean(you can read into that what you want).
One reality I have to confront is that the issue might in fact be me. If I didn't think that at some level, it would be a mistake. That insecurity keeps me motivated. Not sure it changes much but scores could soon affect my compensation. I know scores at schools can vary and even overcome some things often seen as predictors. Speaking of predictions, I think it would be safe to expect similar situations at schools around our state. Some might take comfort in that, we do not.
The chain of teaching, learning, ASSESSING, and improving has many links. It appears to me that one of those is broken. Maybe someone paid more money who doesn't work much with kids can someday help me identify which link it is.
So tonight we get both a Republican and a Tea-Party response to the President's State of the Union Address, so we here at the Teaching Underground have decided to throw our hats into the ring and offer the official "Teaching Underground Grassroots Teacher Response" to the State of the Union Address. We've included relevant text from the President's speech tonight below in italics with our comments embedded. So here we go...
Meanwhile, nations like China and India realized that with some changes of their own, they could compete in this new world. And so they started educating their children earlier and longer, with greater emphasis on math and science.
History has shown us that America is at its greatest when we forge ahead and live up to our unique ideals of democracy and progress. We have seen some our worst moments in times of fear spent chasing after a dream just because a perceivedopponent might reach it first. Innovation is the buzzword of today, but true American innovation is original and "organic." The sheer size of China and India alone must lead us to conclude that in the future we will relate to them as partners on the world stage. Perhaps it is time that we learn what our unique role in this partnership will be instead of chasing their dream and pretending that all we need to do is educate our children the same way they educate theirs.
What’s more, we are the first nation to be founded for the sake of an idea – the idea that each of us deserves the chance to shape our own destiny. That is why centuries of pioneers and immigrants have risked everything to come here. It’s why our students don’t just memorize equations, but answer questions like “What do you think of that idea? What would you change about the world? What do you want to be when you grow up?”
Agreed. That first line may sum up the reason why most of us entered the teaching profession in the first place. But in the current environment of accountability through testing, how do we standardize "what would you change about the world." Our education systems must not lose sight of the value of teaching our students to do more than memorizing equations in it's desire to measure.
Maintaining our leadership in research and technology is crucial to America’s success. But if we want to win the future – if we want innovation to produce jobs in America and not overseas – then we also have to win the race to educate our kids.
We spent much of the twentieth century producing a quality workforce for America. When the corporate world found a better deal they took it. If we want to produce jobs in America, we need to also consider that education is not a race. A race is something you finish and either win or lose. When I attended the University of Virginia, students referred to themselves as first, second, third, or fourth years because in the eyes of its founder, "one cannot reach seniority in learning." We need to understand that education is about Human development, not Human resource development.
Think about it. Over the next ten years, nearly half of all new jobs will require education that goes beyond a high school degree. And yet, as many as a quarter of our students aren’t even finishing high school. The quality of our math and science education lags behind many other nations. America has fallen to 9th in the proportion of young people with a college degree. And so the question is whether all of us – as citizens, and as parents – are willing to do what’s necessary to give every child a chance to succeed.
Also agreed, but it is about more than just sending kids to college. A college degree does not guarantee success anymore. A lack of a college degree is not a death sentence. Our students need a vision of what they can become. Ask any number of unemployed or underemployed college graduates what they think about this comment. Rather than pushing all students into this vague notion of college, we should make sure that our students are thinking about their future and how they hope to give back to the world.
That responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but in our homes and communities. It’s family that first instills the love of learning in a child. Only parents can make sure the TV is turned off and homework gets done. We need to teach our kids that it’s not just the winner of the Super Bowl who deserves to be celebrated, but the winner of the science fair; that success is not a function of fame or PR, but of hard work and discipline.
I appreciate an acknowledgment that the responsibility for the education of our children is not squarely on the shoulders of our schools. We do need to instill a reality check that hard work and discipline are the keys to success, but also the truth that sometimes even this isn't enough. We need to learn from personal failure and understand how to positively respond to setbacks.
Our schools share this responsibility. When a child walks into a classroom, it should be a place of high expectations and high performance. But too many schools don’t meet this test. That’s why instead of just pouring money into a system that’s not working, we launched a competition called Race to the Top. To all fifty states, we said, “If you show us the most innovative plans to improve teacher quality and student achievement, we’ll show you the money.”
I'm writing this tonight with an eye for the weather, wondering whether we will have school tomorrow or not. Sometimes we risk our lives to get to school, and other times we sit home in the rain. If schools were smart, they'd hire a meteorologist to make this decision after all, they're the professionals. Why wouldn't we let the meteorologists make the call on school cancellations? It seems that we're becoming more and more willing to let the economists make the call on school reform.
Race to the Top is the most meaningful reform of our public schools in a generation. For less than one percent of what we spend on education each year, it has led over 40 states to raise their standards for teaching and learning. These standards were developed, not by Washington, but by Republican and Democratic governors throughout the country. And Race to the Top should be the approach we follow this year as we replace No Child Left Behind with a law that is more flexible and focused on what’s best for our kids. You see, we know what’s possible for our children when reform isn’t just a top-down mandate, but the work of local teachers and principals; school boards and communities.
Flexibility is key. This is why education is best left in the hands of local government. We spend so much time and resources on National and State mandates for chunks of money that usually doesn't even cover the cost of implementation. Federal and State governments are essential in setting minimum standards and ensuring equity in education, but their efforts to prescribe policy hurt our ability to effectively and (yes I'll say it) efficiently educate our students.
Take a school like Bruce Randolph in Denver. Three years ago, it was rated one of the worst schools in Colorado; located on turf between two rival gangs. But last May, 97% of the seniors received their diploma. Most will be the first in their family to go to college. And after the first year of the school’s transformation, the principal who made it possible wiped away tears when a student said “Thank you, Mrs. Waters, for showing… that we are smart and we can make it.”
OK, and this example tells us what? Not to be negative, this is a great story, but I'm not sure what it tells us about how to move forward in education.
Let’s also remember that after parents, the biggest impact on a child’s success comes from the man or woman at the front of the classroom. In South Korea, teachers are known as “nation builders.” Here in America, it’s time we treated the people who educate our children with the same level of respect. We want to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones. And over the next ten years, with so many Baby Boomers retiring from our classrooms, we want to prepare 100,000 new teachers in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math.
I do like to think of myself as a builder of people more than a nation, but thank you for the shout out. I can't help but think this is a little bit of a back-door comment however. We have a system too complex to simplify this good teacher/bad teacher dichotomy. Part of the reason I'm a good teacher is that I work for a good system, with adequate support and resources. Within that system I have some of the best students, some of whom would succeed despite my efforts if not because of them. How do you compare that to a teacher struggling to keep student attention daily because they lack necessary resources and administrative support, and the students they teach come into the class struggling. In ideal situations, almost anyone could be a good teacher, but on the contrary, in some systems only a few would have what it takes to be an excellent teacher.
In fact, to every young person listening tonight who’s contemplating their career choice: If you want to make a difference in the life of our nation; if you want to make a difference in the life of a child – become a teacher. Your country needs you.
Yes we do.
These are just a few of my initial reactions, don't judge too harshly. I used to think that national rhetoric about education was just that, harmless rhetoric. After all, the federal government doesn't control our schools. But in the last decade I believe the national rhetoric and the cascade of reforms that it has required greatly impacts the education systems of America.
So there you have the official "Teaching Underground Grassroots Teacher Response" to the State of the Union Address. What are your thoughts? Feel free to share using the comments link below.
My Psychology class has just finished learning about the theories of Sigmund Freud and Psychoanalysis. An underlying principle of these theories is that some things are too painful or hard to deal with so we protect our ego through defense mechanisms. I'm not sure if it is just the leadership of our school systems, or American Society in general, but I believe that public education bashing has become a communal defense mechanism to displace the blame of our national problems.
Just over a decade ago, states across the nation began moving toward accountability through standardized testing. From my observations in Virginia, schools largely rose to the challenge. Virginia SOLs viewed as a minimum standard became a benchmark for certain under-performing schools, and a starting point for others. If the Virginia Standards of Learning are quality measures of student performance and school success, our students are doing well. Statewide results can be found here.
After looking at statewide results for all students, with the exception of one category at 83%, every other category shows pass rates of 86% or higher. We can do better, but we're not doing bad. In my classes, when less than three-quarters of my class performs up to par, I question my overall approach. When ten to twenty percent of my students aren't getting it I question my approach to those students. Public schools in the United States are not failing the majority of our students. Our political and educational leaders continue to look "outside" for the answers and demand greater measures of accountability to drive improvement.
Perhaps the answers to "fixing" our system of education can be found within the system itself. What stops us from looking at the qualities of schools, teachers, and students who find success in and through school? For one, I realize that part of the problem is that a "one-size-fits-all" system of education cannot work. That is one reason that some students succeed while others struggle, we use the success of the majority to justify our methods to educate the population. However, I also think that we are somewhat afraid of asking that question because of what we would find.
The American public education system is exemplary. We have long realized the necessity of making every effort to guarantee an education to all children within the borders of our land regardless of race, parentage, disability, or attitude. In the drive toward accountability and the results of subsequent testing (whether this is valid or not would require more treatment than available here) we realized that we were doing well in educating the populace, but we are certainly falling short with some.
Now that we know which students are failing, we continue to do our best in the classroom to reach those at risk of being left behind. I can't take credit for all of my successes in the classroom. I've had great mentors, helpful peers, and most importantly some excellent students who sometimes perform well despite my efforts rather than because of them. Likewise, I cannot bear complete responsibility for the failures of my students. Critics of our system(s) of education from within or without do a disservice to our nation's children by leveling the blame on "failing schools" and "under-performing teachers." I agree that those problems should be addressed, but I will candidly admit, we can't do it alone.
Education reform that simply introduces new technologies and instructional strategies won't get us there. Calls for greater accountability and greater testing won't move us forward, they will simply continue to illuminate the problem that we all know exists. Privatization and business models will sell to the public and make someone rich, but won't get us where we need to be.
Any honest discussion of education reform must address the societal issues that impact the students we serve and their varied needs from community to community. That's hard work and requires us to think about more than just changing the way schools do business, but changing the fabric of our communities.
